Xen-Devel Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: "Jürgen Groß" <jgross@suse.com>
To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>,
	Igor Druzhinin <igor.druzhinin@citrix.com>
Cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
	Julien Grall <julien@xen.org>, Wei Liu <wl@xen.org>,
	Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
	Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>,
	George Dunlap <george.dunlap@citrix.com>,
	xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 3/5] xen: don't process rcu callbacks when holding a rcu_read_lock()
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2020 09:39:45 +0100
Message-ID: <981a42c5-9499-7f51-f536-05bf0973cac4@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <859b4b9e-d839-0961-6c09-4c6aebefe9e4@suse.com>

On 27.03.20 09:35, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 27.03.2020 09:10, Jürgen Groß wrote:
>> On 27.03.20 00:24, Igor Druzhinin wrote:
>>> On 26/03/2020 09:19, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>>> Some keyhandlers are calling process_pending_softirqs() while holding
>>>> a rcu_read_lock(). This is wrong, as process_pending_softirqs() might
>>>> activate rcu calls which should not happen inside a rcu_read_lock().
>>>>
>>>> For that purpose modify process_pending_softirqs() to not allow rcu
>>>> callback processing when a rcu_read_lock() is being held.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> V3:
>>>> - add RCU_SOFTIRQ to ignore in process_pending_softirqs_norcu()
>>>>     (Roger Pau Monné)
>>>>
>>>> V5:
>>>> - block rcu processing depending on rch_read_lock() being held or not
>>>>     (Jan Beulich)
>>>
>>> Juergen,
>>>
>>> Our BVT revealed a likely problem with this commit in that form.
>>> Since 12509bbeb9e ("rwlocks: call preempt_disable() when taking a rwlock")
>>> preemption is disabled after taking cpu_maps which will block RCU
>>> callback processing inside rcu_barrier itself. This will result in
>>
>> Why would that block RCU callback processing?
>>
>> RCU callbacks should be blocked only if a rcu lock is being held.
>>
>> Did I miss something in my patches?
> 
> Igor, are you perhaps running without "rcu: add assertions to debug
> build"? I think this actually fixes what you describe. Without it
> rcu_barrier(), in its second loop, calling process_pending_softirqs(),
> would cause the RCU softirq to not be invoked anymore with preemption
> disabled. Of course the title of this change doesn't reflect this at
> all.

Right. This explains why I don't see the hang on my test system.

> 
> Jürgen, as an aside, while looking at the code again, I think the
> comment near the end of process_pending_softirqs() would now rather
> belong at its very beginning; should have spotted this while
> reviewing.

Oh, indeed. Will send a patch.


Juergen


  reply index

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-03-26  9:19 [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 0/5] xen/rcu: let rcu work better with core scheduling Juergen Gross
2020-03-26  9:19 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 1/5] xen: introduce smp_mb__[after|before]_atomic() barriers Juergen Gross
2020-03-26  9:19 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 2/5] xen/rcu: don't use stop_machine_run() for rcu_barrier() Juergen Gross
2020-03-26  9:19 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 3/5] xen: don't process rcu callbacks when holding a rcu_read_lock() Juergen Gross
2020-03-26 23:24   ` Igor Druzhinin
2020-03-27  8:10     ` Jürgen Groß
2020-03-27  8:35       ` Jan Beulich
2020-03-27  8:39         ` Jürgen Groß [this message]
2020-03-27  9:56         ` Igor Druzhinin
2020-03-26  9:19 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 4/5] xen/rcu: add assertions to debug build Juergen Gross
2020-03-26  9:19 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH v8 5/5] xen/rcu: add per-lock counter in debug builds Juergen Gross

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=981a42c5-9499-7f51-f536-05bf0973cac4@suse.com \
    --to=jgross@suse.com \
    --cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
    --cc=george.dunlap@citrix.com \
    --cc=ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com \
    --cc=igor.druzhinin@citrix.com \
    --cc=jbeulich@suse.com \
    --cc=julien@xen.org \
    --cc=sstabellini@kernel.org \
    --cc=wl@xen.org \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

Xen-Devel Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/xen-devel/0 xen-devel/git/0.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/xen-devel/1 xen-devel/git/1.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 xen-devel xen-devel/ https://lore.kernel.org/xen-devel \
		xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org xen-devel@lists.xen.org
	public-inbox-index xen-devel

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.xenproject.lists.xen-devel


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git